California Court Of Appeal Limits Plaintiffs' Request For Discovery To Locate New Class Representatives In A "Headless" Class Action

In a ruling on April 25, 2011, the California Court of Appeal for the Fourth Appellate District in Starbucks v. Superior Court (Lords), No. G043650 (Cal. App. Apr. 25, 2011) [link to ruling], overturned a trial court's order allowing a fishing expedition to find class representatives in a "headless" class action. The ruling is instructive for defense of class actions.

On behalf of an estimated 135,000 job applicants, three named plaintiffs sought $26 million in statutory penalties from Starbucks alleging that a preprinted Starbucks' job application violated provisions of the California Labor Code, which prevent employers from seeking "from any source whatsoever" any records pertaining to minor marijuana convictions sustained by job applicants or employees. In an earlier opinion, Starbucks Corp. v. Superior Court, 168 Cal.App.4th 1436 (2008) (Starbucks I), the California Court of Appeals held that the plaintiffs did not have standing to represent the proposed class because none of the plaintiffs had been convicted of a marijuana-related crime.

To read this blog post click here